From a lay perspective (I'm sure some of the clergy on the board could offer a more enlightened take), I think it depends how you take it. If we take it in the more fundamentalist sense - that we all become one by believing the exact same thing in the exact same way acting on the exact same rituals etc. etc. - then no. But if it means that we come together as Christians despite the fact that we might have some varying takes on the matter, and we are welcoming to all whether they are certain of their beliefs, or still on the journey to become certain of them, and the fact that we're on the same road, if not quite at the same intersection, is enough to be pilgrims together then yes I do think it's incredibly important to what we try to achieve as a church.

"that all of them may be one" - united in belief in God, and our love for God and humankind, despite our differences in so many things.

Hello RAN and welcome to the WonderCafe,

I don't think that there has ever been a point in the life of The United Church of Canada when this ideal wasn't important to The United Church of Canada.  And if there ever was, we were seriously mistaken.

And as important as it is I think it is a difficult ideal to come to organically.

So we try to force the issue and make mistakes along the way.

Some confuse unity with uniformity and when they see differences they automatically leap to the conclusion that we have come untied.

Grace and peace to you.

John

2 types of unity come to mind - unity within the UCC, and unity of all who believe in Jesus. Clearly related, both are important.

Obviously John 17 refers to the second, so I thought the UCC motto did too, given UCC origins as a union of churches that had been separate. Is that not the motto's intention?

I certainly agree with all 3 of you that unity must preserve diversity. Isn't  that exactly why the church is a "body". Tthe members are different, have different gifts, responsibilities, perspectives, etc, The body can't work if everyone acts like an eye! Yet the diverse members all are (or can be) united as part of one body. If disunited, the body risks being dysfunctional.

Risks? The body is disfunctional already. The body of Christ is crippled due to the division.

This is quite obvious. The spirit is what unifies us, our flesh is what divides.

Bolt

As I have discovered over and over again, it is not possible to have civil discussion within the UCC on any "hot button" topic.  The motto may have meant something once but it no longer applies, much to the detriment of the church.  Healing divisions through tolerance would be the way to go but that is not my experience.  Those who disagree with the current version of Leftist politics on any number of issues will be called names, shamed, and branded as a bigot.

You can call me cynical if you like.  I am simply relating my experience.  I realize I will be shouted down and called names (even for just saying that i will be shouted down and called names).

The body is very ill and, as we all know from the downward line on the chart, is dying a slow death by attrition.

The motto, originally, referred to the hope that all churches in Canada would some day be united under one umbrella.  It also had a touch of the zeal that all peoples would "come to faith".

It was a vain hope, and a foolish one.  But it was the spirit of the age.

What does it mean now?  I am not sure.  And it is likely worth some exploration.  Further church unions like those we have sen before are less likely.  But in small communities local arrangements to share buildings and/or ministry programmes and/or ministry staff may be more likely.  But as far as the motto goes, we need to ask ourselves: who are "all", what does it mean to "be one"?

I feel your pain DonnyGuitar, but never the less ,we cannot discount those who hold the teachings & the example of Jesus Christ as the fulfillment of our "salvation".

We shouldn't take such things to heart, but we do non the less.

Discernment of truth & deception is not something accomplished only withing the realm of intellectual debate & councel.

It is within spiritual revelation that fulfills this, & come to a point to where one is convinced wholeheartedly.

Bolt

You want people to be tolerant of your intolerance.  It doesn't really work that way.  I do (begrudgingly)  agree that you should not be called names over disagreements.

When you subtract a negative, addition by subtraction is possible.

I rest my case.  I am no longer interested in any dialogue with anyone in the UCC on the subject of same-sex marriage, abortion or the Middle East.  In fact, the UCC is probably the last place in Canada I would look to find people interested in investigating any serious issue.  

Here is the spiritual revelation of UCC members in this forum:  those who disagree are worthy of contempt.  They are bigots.

Perhaps but not all UCC members share this same expression.  Some will just agree to disagree but for sake of conversation, bringing forth a veiw of same sex issues are a strong subject & not for the faint of heart.

What I'm saying is, welcome to the jungle.

This place is still a cool place to duscuss things.

Bolt

I don't mind strong subjects and I don't mind having my mind changed.  That is not the problem.  The problem is that some of the most antagonistic pricks I have ever met on the net turn out to be members of the UCC.   I don't care about the others who are not members.  I thought that the UCC encouraged dialogue.  It doesn't.  We both know that.  

As for a cool place to discuss things, sure, as long as it doesn't challenge anyone's Leftist ideologies.   They despise disagreement.  This forum came out of a desire on the part of the UCC to increase a declining membership and - here is the grand irony - to allow people to question, to discuss, to challenge beliefs.  This is quite true, as long as the beliefs one challenges are not those held by the Left in the UCC.  That would not be questioning; that would be bigotry. Because the left is always right, right?

For those of you who think that the UCC is the place to come if you have doubts about anything, or that diversity is what it is all about, think again. 

Hi RAN,

I disagree with your contention that there are two types of unity.  I strongly believe that you have uniformity confused with unity and that is your problem.

The United Church of Canada consists of various smaller bodies and is itself a smaller body of the Holy Catholic Church.

In much the same way that the cells which make up the heart do not appear, upon close examination to resemble the cells which make up the skeletal structure and yet we can isolate one cell of each, send them to an independent lab on the other side of the country and ask if both cells came from the same body.

Unless the lab selected is incompetent the answer will be yes.

Bone isn't heart and heart isn't bone.

The United Church of Canada did not come about by a union which sought to reduce the Christian faith to the blandest possible expression of faith.  The United Church of Canada hoped that the strengths of each part would compliment one another.  That way there would not be competition in the mutual work of building the Kingdom of God and the combined resources, rather than being used against one another could be focussed outward.

True.  And yet we go back to the difference between unity and uniformity.  Examine the body and its various parts where are they the same?  Where are they different?  Is the difference a matter of appearance or is there something deeper?

Grace and peace to you.

John

Clearly we can find bases for disunity. Are we not called to make unity a priority - without abandoning diversity, and without abondoning the "message" (referred to in John 17:20, above)? How do we prevent disagreements from creating disunity?

GordW's reference to a "vain hope, and .. foolish ..." sounds disheartening, though possibly quite accurate. However, the shared ministries are surely a step in the direction of unity. Shouldn't that be an important direction to move in?

revjohn, the current UCC is clearly seeking uniformity.  Those for whom church is primarily a political statement do not tolerate any difference whatsoever.   Please, please, please, take the time to LISTEN to ordinary people in the church and their experience of being marginalized because of their difference of opinion with what seems to be church orthodoxy.

Donny, I agree with you.  But there are almost as many stories of people who feel silenced within the UCCan on the other extreme--either by their congregation or by higher courts.  ANd sometimes it happens in the same place on the same issue at both ends of the spectrum at the same time.

Hi Ran,

We can.

The question remains though, are these differences of degree or kind?  I would expect that the cells forming bone do not resemble the cells forming the heart.  And even though I can see those differences and find those differences there is still at some level a uniformity that prevents the immune system from attacking one or the other.

Unity is a priority.  Uniformity is not.

Part of the problem affecting all points of the theological spectrum is discomfort with diversity.  It is that discomfort which creates disunity.  If we panic simply because somebody thinks differently than we do there is no hope to form unity.

The benchmark of the Church is love.

Can we love one another?

We are not required to be clones.  We are not required to agree.  We are called to love.

Love is not an easy task.  Where there is a discrepancy between the lover and the beloved something is wrong and that needs to be explored.  More often than not what is found is that the lover and the beloved have different understandings of what constitutes loving behaviour.

If there is no dialogue to bring those divergent understandings together unity will not happen.

GordW is my colleague in ministry.  We do not agree about all things.  On this matter I think we are theological worlds apart.  I find the hope neither vain nor foolish.  I recognize that vain fools often get in the way of that hope.  I don't suffer any anxiety for that.

Shared ministries are a lot like amalgamations.  Fun and game until the action starts.  They can be a solution, they may not be.  

Grace and peace to you.

John

Hi DonnyGuitar,

There are some who would love to have uniformity, yes.  Those desires are found on both the left and right edges of the theological spectrums.  They are only allowed to carry the agenda if those who care more for unity step back.

Agreed.  We are not all in the church for the politics.  Some are here because they were called to service and they serve exceedingly well.

What makes you think that I am the poster boy for "what seems to be church orthodoxy?"

Is the UCCAN moving back to a more Calvinist foundation?

Why would you assume that I do not listen to tales of marginalization or that I don't have some of my own?

Grace and peace to you.

John

I've come believe that our seperate individuals is an illusion.  Who we are depends on the family we are born into and the connections and encounters in our lives.  Even original ideas are built upon the knowledge and ideas of others.  We are not born in a vaccum.  Even the air we breath hhas passed through the bodies of others.---all is one, we are all part of the universe. 

I also believe we share in the suffering of others.  If others are oppressed, then I am not safe.  If others are hungry or homeless, then I am vulnerablee to war and crime  Jesus took this further when he said, "You do this to the least of these, you do it onto me."  i am attract to the United Church precisely because of this sens of unity and social justce,  Jesus body is in the bread and blood is the wine, both of which represent the basic nutrient of life which we all need and share. When I take part in the  Eucharist in the Anglican church I am reminded of this on a weekly or even twice weekly  basis

Thank you mgf50 for concrete examples of how individuals can experience the unity of the Church by crossing denominational lines.

Dear GOd,

Please do not let John move  the church to a Calvinist foundation.

Thanks in advance,

Gord (A Pelagian, Arminian, non-Calvinist who thinks Tulips are pretty flowers not theological doctrines)

Hi GordW,

What's this?  A Pelagian, Arminian, non-Calvinist appealing to God's grace!

Not trusting in the arm of flesh now?

Grace and peace to you.

John 

More trusting in God's wisdom to keep the Calvinists down.  Although in reality I (and teh UCCan as a whole) could likely be described as "Calminian".  A friend of mine coined that term to describe herself--she had been raised and confirmed Free Methodist and then became Baptist.

Hi GordW,

Trusting in God to keep the Calvinists down?  You guys don't trust God to save you do you think he is potent enough to keep Calvinists in check.

Confused.  The word is confused.  It starts with a C like Calminian.

Grace and peace to you.

John

UNITED CHURCH members should all be one.  We should sew them all together and make one giant Church member. (Man, I'm in an impish mood today)

Unless of course, the least among us happens to be the unborn.  In that case, the UCC has no interest whatsoever.

revjohn, with all due respect, on what planet do you live?  What church are you talking about?  Surely not the UCC.   Those who disagree with the hard left political agenda are silenced through shame and name-calling.  There is no dialogue.

Hi DonnyGuitar,

The same one you live on unless Rogers is wicked good at getting me hooked into off-world internet channels.

I am talking about the UCC.  The Church to which I have belonged since confirmation in 1979.

I don't doubt that has been your experience.  It has not been mine.  Yes I have had folk on the left and the right of the theological spectrum dismiss me.  I don't turn tail and run.  Dialogue is much harder work than whining and painting everyone with the same brush.

Grace and peace to you.

John

You mean like the UCC lefties do with everyone?  Painting everyone with the same brush?  Try disagreeing sometime, or asking questions, or offering an opinion.   I am not whining, I am merely pointing out the truth which, once again, you dismiss.

btw, I find your final "grace and peace" to be incredibly disingenuous.  You are just as snide as the rest.

Hi DonnyGuitar,

Not at all.  You are pointing out what has been your experience.  If you want to lift that up as an example of a universal truth it is likely to be challenged.

My experience has been very different from yours.  I do not present my experience as an example of a universal truth.  Feel free to challenge it nonetheless.

I think that it is most likely that the truth lies somewhere in between.

Fair enough.

Grace and peace to you.

John

Donny: I am a United Church of Canada member, admittedly progressive in my religion and centre-left in my politics. However, while I am anti-capital punishment, I can sympathize with those who are for it as I have that gut instinct of 'this bleeper deserves what he gets'; while I am pro-choice, I sympathize with the pro-life movement as an infertile woman who believes adoption is a better option than abortion; I am pro-gay rights/gay marriage, but am still unused/unexposed enough to homosexuality that I must admit to not being 100% comfortable with it. Despite agreeing 99% of the time with my even-more-liberal husband, I often find myself playing conservative devil's advocate because I understand the mindset, even though upon analysis I have ultimately disagreed with it myself.

Therefore, while I have no doubt the experiences you've described have indeed been your experience thus far with UCCers, it is obvious you haven't met ALL of them, and I would encourage, before you accuse us of tarring all with the same brush, to be wary of doing the same thing yourself. I will happily engage in discussion with anyone - be we in agreement or disagreement - in a respectful way and acknowledge the good points you have, even if they don't ultimately convince me in the face of what *I* think/feel/know. While this might run counter to your point of view of UCCers, I hope so, as it has been MY experience that most are like me (I am still on a journey of self-discovery in terms of my theology and my politics, and whichever way I have gone - more or less conservative or progressive, traditional or forward-thinking, the UCC has always been supportive of that journey and I have never felt uncomfortable within it; while I am sorry you have, it isn't fair to speak of ALL UCCers in the same manner as those you have interacted with).

Oh spare me the bullshit, please.  Of course not all UCC'ers are the same.  However, the ndp/left in the UCC assumes that anyone who deviates even slightly from their party line is a bigot and an asshole and has no trouble saying so.

Yah, right.  I have been convinced beyond any doubt by people in this forum, including clergy, that respectful dialogue is not possible.  I am a bigot, don't you know?

My experience has been that of countless others who hold modest views on any number of issues.  Our experience has been that the ndp/ucc left will do anything it can to silence dissent. It will use every name and trick in the book.  It is not in the slightest bit interested in civil dialogue.  You have seen many of my posts in the past.  You have seen how I have asked over and over for civil exchange on the issue of same-sex marriage, regardless of difference of opinion, and you have seen over and over again how I have been insulted, attacked, shouted down, and been called names.  You call that whining because you can't face the truth.  Go ahead and dismiss my experience all you like.  You know what I say is true and you know it is driving people out of the church.

Donny, have you considered the possibility that the UCC'ers you've interacted with, want you to shut up because they don't want to be associated with you?

Hi John,

I'm not sure, but I think we may agree on the relation between unity and uniformity.

The model for unity in John 17:21 is the unity of Jesus and he Father. In that case unity seems (to me) to be very different from uniformity.

In our case unity may indeed depend on "some level of uniformity", as you suggest when explaining how cells of bone and heart can play their diverse roles as parts of a single body. So although unity may indeed rely on "some level of uniformity", unity and uniformity are surely different, and our model should be unity not uniformity.

That's also the message I read in John 17 and in the UCC motto. It seems to be an important message.

What I am less clear about though, is how the priority of unity works out in practice. I don't want to argue for uniformity. I can argue some more against uniformity if you want me to. But can you help me see some of the ways that unity is being given priority?

Hi DonnyGuitar,

I would appreciate it very much if you spoke for yourself.  Or, at the very least, provided material that allowed me to ascertain that you are indeed the spokesperson for a multitude of others.

I respect that is your experience.  I am not on the liberal side of the theological spectrum.  At least not on all things.  I do not hide where I sit on positions nor do I take positions simply because they are "liberal" or "conservative" or "rightist" or "leftist."

It is human and it is not above pulling the same kind of stunts that those to the right of centre have pulled.  I have no doubt that you have faced hostility.  I also have no doubt that you have been the face of hostility.

You can point fingers at others and lob blame or you can take responsibility for your own self.

I do not read every thread here so I may or may not have seen all that you describe.

The tactics you describe have been employed in both directions and in heated discussion insult, attack and name calling flow freely.  That is, unfortunately, part of what it means to be human.

I call it whining because rather than simply duck out you decided to crack and return it in kind.

Contrary to your ranting I have not dismissed your experience.  I have simply stated that I do not believe it is as universal as you insist it is.  I have countered that with my own experience which you freely dismiss and feel justified by doing so and yet get up in arms that someone might dismiss your own experience.

I believe it is true to you.  I do not believe that it is absolute truth.

Well DonnyGuitar, I won't deny that the constant bickering does turn people off.  It takes two to tango and since you appear to love to dance so much you are a willing partner in that constant bickering.

You can point fingers elsewhere.  Your behaviour recently is hardly any better.

You have shared that you keep your mouth shut in your congregation for the sake of peace.  That is not my fault nor is it the fault of anyone else here.  If you want to take that mounting anger of yours out on us there is little we can do to stop it.  That doesn't solve the problem of your hypocrisy and getting mad at us because you can't swallow compromise anymore doesn't change what you have put on your own plate.

For the record.  While WonderCafe is a vehicle of The United Church of Canada we have never made membership in The United Church of Canada a requirement for participation at WonderCafe.

Not everyone you are currently at odds with is, in fact, a member of The United Church of Canada.  That is you painting with a wide brush again.  I know that you don't care and I suspect the reminder is only fuel for the fire.

Grace and peace to you.

John

[/quote]

That is about as hypocritical as it gets.  You call me out for being an asshole but are quite happy to look the other way when your buddies with the same political view do the same thing. 

grace and peace.  yah, right.

Hi DonnyGuitar,

I don't pay attention to anyone's politics here.  I certainly don't advertise mine.  So now that we have dealt with that particular odium let's move on to the rest of it.

If my buddies were complaining about the way that they were being treated and they were behaving the same way what makes you think I wouldn't call them on that?

Where, politically, do you think jon71 sits?

Where, politically, do you think James Dobson sits?

Which do you think I am closer to politically?

It is offered freely.  I won't force you to take it.

Only you know if you have need of either.

Grace and peace to you.

John

I hope you aren't kicked out.  It certainly won't be me flagging your posts or asking for your removal.  I recognize that you are not the typical UCC'er, but you are very representative of a number of religious people, and I'm all too happy to highlight your brand of ignorance and hate.

Edit:  I'm sorry to see that the WC admins have deleted a number of your posts.  I suspected they would, but more troubling is that they deleted mine as well.  Probably because I quoted you, but they could have removed the quotes instead, and sanitized your posts.  I can see how sanitizing your posts would take some time, however.

S'OK.  Being used to WC, I saved the thread last night.  Let me know if you want a copy of your remarks.

I am gobsmacked that Olivet_Sarah's gentle, reasoned, and concilliatory post was met with such horrible disrespect, invective and swearing.  Wow.

Irony meter just smashed to pieces.

DG -- you came here to WC swinging your fists.  You had a lot of prejudices and an axe to grind from the get go. 

Please don't be surprised when it isn't well received.  The chip on your shoulder has turned into a railway tie.

 There are many here who have more conservative views than you have who manage to stay respectful.

Have you ever considered becoming Catholic?

No, you're right. If I sense hatred or bigotry, I will call people on it, as I would hope my ignorance or hypocrisy would get pointed out to me as well. It isn't me whose arguments aren't standing up to scrutiny, and who is dismissing at and/or flailing furiously at anyone who questions where I stand. You have just done so (questioning me) and I welcome the questions and a chance to respond because I am comfortable with what I believe, and don't feel the need to make personal attacks, curse or generalize in order to make my points.

Well that is not my fault nor my problem if you would sooner brush off an offering of reasonable discussion and debate, because it was sincere. I have no way of knowing whether or not you are a bigot, because you are too busy throwing accusations around to enumerate any of your own beliefs, which tells me that perhaps you're right, and perhaps the reason you don't expose them to scrutiny is that they won't stand up to it. I am deeply sorry your experience with the UCC has left you so embittered; it certainly hasn't been mine, and if my making an offer to change your mind is simply 'bullshit' as you stated above, well, I'm not especially inclined to devote a whole lot of time in my day to proving otherwise. I believe it is our/my job to reach out as Christians, but not to those who have no inclination to reach back.

I can only be called a bigot so many times before I get royally pissed off.  Tough shit if you don't like it.

Hi Chansen,

I wouldn't be so quick to lay that at the doorstep of the Admin here.

I have also noticed that the material of a number of posts has been "editted" rather than deleted.

I have noticed in the past that Admin when deleting a post usually takes the entire post out altogether.

What I have seen this morning is that posts made by Donny Guitar have been replaced with a "-"

This suggests to me that it is actually DonnyGuitar who has removed the material.

I suggest this because we do not have the ability to delete our own posts only the ability to edit them.

If whole posts are removed, then that is most likely the work of Admin.

Grace and peace to you.

John 

I suspected they would, but more troubling is that they deleted mine as well.  Probably because I quoted you, but they could have removed the quotes instead, and sanitized your posts.  I can see how sanitizing your posts would take some time, however.

S'OK.  Being used to WC, I saved the thread last night.  Let me know if you want a copy of your remarks.

[/quote]

I would love to respond but my bigotry prevents me.  I am applying for a uccndp "mind correction camp."  Hopefully that will fix everything.

Don't panic.  I am sure there are others whom you can needle, insult, and call names. 

Hi John,

A number of Donny's posts are gone this morning, as are my replies to him.  No "null" posts are in their places.

As I say, I can hardly blame admin on this one.  Donny really went above and beyond this time.  I don't particularly like it, but I don't run the site.

Just wanted to hurry and add that I suggested becoming Catholic because their official position is more aligned to what I understand your beliefs to be DG. 

For no other reason and no disrespect to Catholics.

I think you're more accoplished than I am at the last two.  By the time I got to you, you were already overheated from your discussions with  Witch, Adz...(sorry), and John.  Your claims were refuted, your positions shown to be in conflict with one-another, and you were fighting mad.

I came into the debate late, with the simple observation that people might not be taking you seriously not because of what you say, but how you say it.  In your odd way of refuting that, you then proceeded to say a number of things that people wouldn't want to be associated with, in a way that people wouldn't want to be associated with.  It was like watching you self-destruct in slow motion.

In any case, I'm glad you're still here.  If you want to schedule another time to self-destruct, I could be available tonight, around 10:30.

And panic?  No, I'm a hoopy frood and I know where my towel is.

Hurrah for a reasoned response! If you are angry with your situation, change your situation. I would be sad, as I think the UCC and WC benefit from a wide variety of viewpoints, but I have no sympathy with people choosing a lot in life which makes them unhappy, and then railing to the heavens abut how unhappy they are.